lol at Rock/Orton. Not happening for a number of reasons. Orton's no longer at that level, and he's been booked to shit in the last few months. Not to mention he's not dropping the viper gimmick so I don't see the entertainment value in the feud if we get current Orton facing Rock. Plus there are several better options.

Out of the current roster, there are only two guys who have the credibility to face Rock and that's Cena and CM Punk. So the way I see it, for RR and WM, these are the possibilities:

1:
RR- Rock beats Punk
WM29- Cena beats Rock

2:
RR- Punk beats Rock due to outside interference from Cena
WM29- Punk vs Cena vs Rock for the title at WM

3:
RR- Rock beats Punk
WM- Triple threat between Punk, Rock, and Cena for the title

4:
RR- Rock beats Cena
WM29- Punk beats Rock

5:
RR- Cena beats Rock due to outside interference from Punk
WM29- Punk vs Cena vs Rock for the title at WM

6:
RR- Rock beats Cena
WM- Triple threat between Punk, Rock, and Cena for the title

That's all I can see as far as strictly full-time guys who are credible enough to face The Rock. The only other one that *might* be credibly able to face Rock is Ryback depending on where they go with him. I'd hate to see it, but Ryback's definitely on his way up. Not sure if he'll be at that level by the RR though.

Has it really come to the point that people feel like 'only certain people are worthy of Rock'?

I knew he was above and beyond the majority of this roster but how else do you make people into stars? Jobbing them out to The Rock? NO! That's fucking stupid because Rock's just going to up and leave. Nobody gains anything from that in the long-term. Sure, WWE will make money out of him but they'll cost themselves money by using someone who's not even a permanent member of the roster beating them all.

Rock has NEVER had an issue with doing the job for ANYONE and I know for a fact that losing to Ziggler or Bryan wouldn't change a single thing he has done in the past. It wouldn't ruin the Rock's legacy, it would probably make him that much more memorable were he to put over a heel Daniel Bryan for the title after an epic Rumble-Mania build.

Cena over Rock? Boring.

Punk over Rock? Better but Punk is already a fucking star.

Orton over Rock? See Punk.

What is the point in having Rock come in and do another match if you're not actually going to try to use him to get someone else over? What does Rock losing to Cena, Orton or Punk achieve? Nothing. Nobody gains anything from that on either side.

Now I could go with Brock Vs Rock but then you need to take the winner and have HIM lose to someone new.

And I get the "beating Yoshi Tatsu on Superstars" to "beating Rock at Mania" jump is crazy but, in an ideal world, WWE would actually push the guy beforehand rather than job him out (although that's relatively obvious).

Has it really come to the point that people feel like 'only certain people are worthy of Rock'?

I knew he was above and beyond the majority of this roster but how else do you make people into stars? Jobbing them out to The Rock? NO! That's fucking stupid because Rock's just going to up and leave. Nobody gains anything from that in the long-term. Sure, WWE will make money out of him but they'll cost themselves money by using someone who's not even a permanent member of the roster beating them all.

Rock has NEVER had an issue with doing the job for ANYONE and I know for a fact that losing to Ziggler or Bryan wouldn't change a single thing he has done in the past. It wouldn't ruin the Rock's legacy, it would probably make him that much more memorable were he to put over a heel Daniel Bryan for the title after an epic Rumble-Mania build.

Cena over Rock? Boring.

Punk over Rock? Better but Punk is already a fucking star.

Orton over Rock? See Punk.

What is the point in having Rock come in and do another match if you're not actually going to try to use him to get someone else over? What does Rock losing to Cena, Orton or Punk achieve? Nothing. Nobody gains anything from that on either side.

Now I could go with Brock Vs Rock but then you need to take the winner and have HIM lose to someone new.

And I get the "beating Yoshi Tatsu on Superstars" to "beating Rock at Mania" jump is crazy but, in an ideal world, WWE would actually push the guy beforehand rather than job him out (although that's relatively obvious).

Maybe if The Rock was losing on a B ppv it would be acceptable but him losing at a big 4 ppv to a wrestler from this generation will not cut it at all. Nobody believes a guy like Bryan,Ziggler,Barrett,etc has a chance at beating the rock

Punk beating Rock at WM 29 would be the most epic moment in this Era IMO, followed by Punk beating Cena at MITB. It needs to happen. So what if Punk is already a star? He is a main eventer now but he needs to set his name in history and a victory like this is just what he needs to do that. Plus an up and coming star like Ziggler/Barrett beating Rock just can't happen, Rock is too big of a name to lose to someone like that, plus they can't risk it unless they are sure they will follow up with a big push. Ryback is the only other guy who i can see beating Rock, because he has the whole 'Monster' build up and if he proves to be talented and over, making him beat Rock wouldn't be that bad of a decision, also for Ryback's case it is likely he would get a big push after it.

Well, I'm not stupid. I know it's a lot more complicated than 'put someone over Rock, make them for life' but it's a mother fucking start.

It's more than just me being a 'jaded fan' or a 'mark' for whoever, it's a matter of building stars. Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler are just examples of guys who are just bellow that Main Event status so I thought using them would make sense.

I wouldn't be entirely opposed to Sheamus beating Rock since he's still a relatively new Main Event guy but he's getting the Triple H push so I don't think it would benefit him as much as it would someone who hasn't broken through to the Main Event yet.

All of these theories aren't based on the current booking anyway because I think we can all agree that the current booking is at least 60% bullshit.

Well, I'm not stupid. I know it's a lot more complicated than 'put someone over Rock, make them for life' but it's a mother fucking start.

It's more than just me being a 'jaded fan' or a 'mark' for whoever, it's a matter of building stars. Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler are just examples of guys who are just bellow that Main Event status so I thought using them would make sense.

I wouldn't be entirely opposed to Sheamus beating Rock since he's still a relatively new Main Event guy but he's getting the Triple H push so I don't think it would benefit him as much as it would someone who hasn't broken through to the Main Event yet.

All of these theories aren't based on the current booking anyway because I think we can all agree that the current booking is at least 60% bullshit.

Ziggler/Bryan can only beat Rock by cheating or some other controversial way, and even that would seem kind of weird for Rock to lose. Rock can only lose to top faces who are meant to be extremely credible, like Sheamus or Ryback, not Bryan or Ziggler, as talented as they are. Tell me any time that someone as credible as Rock/Austin lost to someone at the same level as Bryan/Ziggler on a big event, a rare Raw match like Rock vs Hurricane doesn't count.